Report: State should not operate every park
By Matt Weiser, Sacramento Bee
A study released Monday by the Little Hoover Commission recommends that California should consider divesting some of its state parks and permanently turning them over to local agencies.
The 120-page report is the result of a year-long investigation that began before financial scandals emerged in July 2012 at the California Department of Parks and Recreation. Among other things, department leaders were found to be hiding $22 million even as they moved to close 70 of the 278 state parks due to state budget cuts. Numerous other investigations have probed these events.
Vikingsholm at Lake Tahoe. Photo/LTN file
The 14-member Little Hoover Commission, appointed by the governor and Legislature, chose to focus on long-term survival of the state parks system, the largest in the nation.
“We felt it was more important to push harder on everything else that needs to be done,” said Stuart Drown, the commission’s executive director.
The commission found that the parks department is burdened by an obsolete management structure; it can’t raise enough money from visitor fees to replace cuts in funding from the state general fund; and land acquisition using voter-approved bonds has outpaced maintenance budgets.
“A great public institution is falling apart,” commissioner Virginia Ellis said in a statement.
The most controversial of six recommendations calls for appointing an advisory council to decide which parks have true “statewide significance” and which serve more regional or local needs. Those in the latter category should be transferred to local agencies.
The primary reason is that the department, heeding voters’ wishes, used bond funds to add 168,000 acres to the park system since the 1990s. But operational funding declined, partly because of general fund cuts by the governor and Legislature.
As a result, today there is a maintenance backlog in the system that exceeds $1 billion, and many of the state’s finest natural resources and historical treasures are in severe decay. Interpretive programs and park ranger staffing have also declined.
“The growth curve for the department is no longer in acreage, but in deferred maintenance,” the report states.
It commission recommends other reforms, including adding a new job classification of “park manager.” This would allow employees other than park rangers, who must have peace-officer training, to oversee a park.
It also urges the governor and Legislature to commit to a consistent level of general fund support for parks, and to allow parks to keep more of the money they generate locally. The department should also commission an independent study of crime trends in the parks and hire more park rangers accordingly.
Carolyn Schoff, president of the California League of Park Associations, was pleased by the study but said the idea of eliminating parks from the state system will be controversial.
“Certainly we want to keep our park system intact,” she said. “But if this is a recommendation that will keep the parks as open and available as they were intended to be, I think it’s a possibility.”
Several in Tahoe should be at the top of the hit list, the meadow and golf course #1 & 2, IMHO.
“opertate”????
the idea that parks should be profit making is absurd – we dont insist that police, libraries, and schools all make money. There are legitimate social services that benefit society as a whole – this arguement was had and resolved over 100 years ago(that was also when the country agreed that physical fitness was a desired national trait – lol) Plus, parks play a key role in generating local economic activity. Much of dissing is a knee jerk reaction to current political fallout. It should be kept in mind that no one at Ca State Parks was accused of stealing, and even if they were, throwing out the baby with the bath water is another absurd reaction.
That said I am sure there are things that can be done to make park management more effective. And yes the idea that every permanant employee in the field needs to be a armed law enforcement official probably costs the park a lot of money and I know it keeps many resource manager graduates away from Ca State Pks as a desired employee. Plus every park agency tends to have backlogs of mtnce because legislatures and beaurocrats always find it sexier to build something new rather than fix what is old and needs fixing. In fact Americans excel at this – just look at all the tearing down multi-million dollar sports stadiums that were less than 40 years old. So this isnt just a park management issue.
I think how society treats things like parks, art, and education are all key indicators of societal strength and how we are currently treating all of these things shows how backwards we have slid – and this from what is stil the richest country in the world. This is what happens when “me” is repeatedly and permanently more important than “us.”
When I visit Vikingsholm by car I hope the parking fee goes to pay for the operation and maintanence of it. When I come by boat and tour the home, I gladly pay the fee and again hope it stays locally. Raise the fees for those of us who use the parks. We are the ones benefiting and should be willing to help them break even on their costs, but not make a profit.
that is the two edge sword – many parks are required to generate fees but that doesnt mean it comes back to that specific site. And unless we are willing to say parks are only for the weathly, how do you charge fees that cover all the costs. Its like with roads – you may not drive, but you benefit from them neverthless. If parks provide critical habitat and environmental functions (like marshes that filter pollutants, plants that provide oxygen, and watersheds that provide water – how the heck do you throw all that cost on folks that park or hike there as well! Those folks do pay extra (admission fees) but admission fees cant be expected to cover the whole cost of maintaining the park or forest.